Search results for query: *

So far what I've seen is the parking brake since you have to source things yourself. other than that I think it's a slam dunk and I'm planning on it myself. Loads of videos and threads on how to do it now. Good luck!

Not sure what you're building but lots of people have gotten away with a decent torque wrench, a good set of feeler gauges and some plastigauge for literally decades. I am sure I'll get hammered for suggesting such ham fisted methods, but they work.

I get what you are saying and yeah, at the end of the day, regardless of whether or not I am starting with a stocker 318 or a maxed out 340, there are too many variables to come up with a "general" equation around the area of the piston (bore) by itself.

All fair but I am talking specifically about that single change from a theoretical standpoint. Obviously there would be different parts involved with a bigger piston etc, but on paper, what would that 1.3 sq/in add.

Hadn't considered heat dissipation. I was thinking more simply about the burn having more surface area to push down on per stroke and wondering if there is a decent way to estimate how much additional power was possible just on that factor alone.

How much effect does the almost 1.3 sq/in in area of the piston come into play wrt a 4 vs 4.2" bore? it's almost 10% more surface to push down so I'd have to think that has some impact. if so, how much?

Next in line if this isn't already sold

There was an article in one of the mags when I was a kid in the 80s's about doing this. My buddy built one and it ended up being a nice little motor for the time. Relatively cheap street motor since he and I worked at an auto parts sore with a machine shop. However as everyone keeps saying...

PM sent

My point is that labels etc are used by people to shutdown the conversation regardless of "correctness". We see it all the time. I think we're saying mostly the same thing. If not, well so be it.

"shut down" == "making them give up". I'm not a shrink so I'm not going to psychoanalyze, or pretend I have that ability to win an argument. You either have standing in a disagreement or you don't. Shutting down the discussion isn't "winning" the argument. btw, a true narcissist is hard to...

One of my all time favorite non-mopar cars. Neighbor had three of them when I was a teen, brother in law had a trac-pac car. Things are bad ***.

By todays current standards, just about everyone will be called that at some point. While I see the "humor" in this sort of thing I can't help but to think it's a small way to normalize being called a narcissist as it's a favorite way to shut down or invalidate someone during an argument.

A little WD-40 and that'll clean right up!

He means exactly what he's saying. The early A wiring is super simple. What you have in your early A is a rats nest and not original in any way shape or form. it would be best to strip al of that out and start over

I had a 67 Fairlane GT-A when I was a kid. Had a 390 in it which had "GT" heads that were closer to a 427 medium riser head. Biggest option in 67 was the 427 FE.

PM sent

Honestly with something like that you'd probably better off making a silicone mold and using resin. There is a YT vid (probably many) showing how to do it for the 70's style rectangle lenses.

Yeah that's for our benefit.... other countries measure their rim size in metric.... but as you point out, the bolt pattern on the shiny new charger is 5x115.... Times, they are a changing....

Even as someone, who like most here, grew up using the imperial system, I find it hilarious when people claim things like "We Americans ONLY use the IMPERIAL system!"... puhlease... That just tells me they don't actually understand that by using it, they are, in fact, using something that had...

:rofl:

Fascinating.... oh wait... Fun fact, not all countries who claim adherence to the metric system actually use it in its entirety. Ask a brit how far it is from London to North Yorkshire.... you'll get a distance in MILES. Yes, the road signs all use MILES... so anyway... So instead of...

My understanding is when we helped Europe rebuild we retooled for their metric specs and never reverted back to our original setup. EDIT. Metric not be right, but I'm pretty sure it's a euro spec.

:rofl:

I hope the regret doesn't come from me. I've said my part and will go back to sitting down an learning.

People take flow numbers as gospel often times. I know I used to. The truth is it's a tool used to try to understand what is happening with the flow going through some passage, in our case, cyl heads. The problem with that is it's not "really" what's going in inside the head in it's intended...

Not a head porter, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night but my understanding of the "Your flow bench is lying to you" refers to a couple of things. 1. Engines don't run at 28" so it's not really representative of what's going on in the engine. 2. Engines don't run "dry", see #1 3...

just my completely non-expert opinion, but I seem to remember the area in the center of the bowl to be lower velocity or flow (both mabye). IF that's the case, then it seems like this is a good way to wrap the cyl wall side flow, around the common wall side at the last minute to help increase...

:rofl:

Lots of factors. Here are a few. Do you have the original part? if you do, it can be scanned which "could" eliminate the need for cad, though some cad work will probably be required. it also might be the case the part is simple to draw up. Car parts weren't drawn using computers, rather basic...